The AIA did not Change Long-Standing Precedent Governing the On-Sale Bar
Recent Publications
5 IP Rules to Know to Protect Your Business in the United States (article in French)
Coaching INPI Newsletter
Headquartered within steps of the USPTO with an affiliate office in Tokyo, Oblon is one of the largest law firms in the United States focused exclusively on intellectual property law.
1968
Norman Oblon with Stanley Fisher and Marvin Spivak launched what was to become Oblon, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, LLP, one of the nation's leading full-service intellectual property law firms.
Outside the US, we service companies based in Japan, France, Germany, Italy, Saudi Arabia, and farther corners of the world. Our culturally aware attorneys speak many languages, including Japanese, French, German, Mandarin, Korean, Russian, Arabic, Farsi, Chinese.
Oblon's professionals provide industry-leading IP legal services to many of the world's most admired innovators and brands.
From the minute you walk through our doors, you'll become a valuable part of a team that fosters a culture of innovation, client service and collegiality.
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued final rules implementing the inventor's oath or declaration provisions of the America Invents Act (AIA) on August 14, 2012.
April 28-30, 2024
November 16, 2023 - In-Person in Munich
October 27, 2023
The AIA did not Change Long-Standing Precedent Governing the On-Sale Bar
In June 2017, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CACF) interpreted for the first time the new prior art provision (35 USC 102(a)(1)) of the American Invents Act (AIA). See an earlier publication on Helsinn Healthcare v. Teva Pharmaceuticals here. The panel of three judges held that an invention could be "on sale," and thus barred from patentability, even if the details of the claimed invention were not made available to the public via the sale or offer for sale. This holding came as a surprise to many commentators who believed that the new language in Article 102(a)(1) “or otherwise available to the public” modified the preceding phrase “on sale.” The CAFC was recently asked to rehear and reconsider the case. The Court denied the request, and in a concurring opinion dated January 16, 2018 Circuit Judge O’Malley (on the original panel) explicitly confirmed his view “that the AIA did not change long-standing precedent governing the on-sale bar.” Thus, when companies offer for sale their technology (even under a confidential agreement) anywhere in the World, they should be aware that such offers could trigger a bar against the patentability of the technology even when the offers do not make the claimed invention available to the public. The patent owner will likely appeal the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Coaching INPI Newsletter